Java – Play 2.0+Java vs. Play 2.0+Scala

javaplayframework-2.0scala

I am thinking about migrating to play 2.0 after play 1.2. One thing that bothers me is that people say Scala is more "preferred" for a play 2.0 application. I know the differences over 1.2 and 2.0, but I'm unsure if there are differences between Play 2.0 with Java and Play 2.0 with Scala

So there are questions in my mind:

Is there anything that I cannot do with java over scala in a Play
2.0 application?
What advantages do I have if I start to learn and use scala in a
play 2.0 application?

Best Answer

I just finished a prototype using Play 2.0 with Java and now am considering to learn Scala just so I can switch to it for further development.

It's not just the usual Java vs. Scala discussion - the problem as I see it with the Play framework is that it forces Scala idioms onto Java. An example from the documentation about calling multiple web services:

public static Result feedComments(String feedUrl) {
  return async(
    WS.url(feedUrl).get().flatMap(
      new Function<WS.Response, Promise<Result>>() {
        public Promise<Result> apply(WS.Response response) {
          return WS.url(response.asJson().findPath("commentsUrl").get().map(
            new Function<WS.Response, Result>() {
              public Result apply(WS.Response response) {
                return ok("Number of comments: " + response.asJson().findPath("count"));
              }
            }
          );
        }
      }
    )
  );
}

It works but doesn't look like conventional Java. Those parentheses look really scary. Even Eclipse gets confused and never knows what generics I need or want to use - I always have to choose them manually.

Also note that in the documentation they made this look pretty by removing @Override annotations, using just two spaces for indentation and overall choosing a very simple example without validation or error recovery so they don't use too many lines. I'm not even sure you could configure a code formatter to output it like this without messing up other code completely.

In practice I ended up with an unreadable block of a horrible Java-Scala-abomination just for getting some data from another service.

Unfortunately I can't find any example of combining responses in Scala. At least calling single web services in Scala looks much shorter and easier to read.

Related Solutions

Java – What are the differences between a HashMap and a Hashtable in Java

There are several differences between HashMap and Hashtable in Java:

Hashtable is synchronized, whereas HashMap is not. This makes HashMap better for non-threaded applications, as unsynchronized Objects typically perform better than synchronized ones.
Hashtable does not allow null keys or values. HashMap allows one null key and any number of null values.
One of HashMap's subclasses is LinkedHashMap, so in the event that you'd want predictable iteration order (which is insertion order by default), you could easily swap out the HashMap for a LinkedHashMap. This wouldn't be as easy if you were using Hashtable.

Since synchronization is not an issue for you, I'd recommend HashMap. If synchronization becomes an issue, you may also look at ConcurrentHashMap.

Java – Is Java “pass-by-reference” or “pass-by-value”

Java is always pass-by-value. Unfortunately, when we deal with objects we are really dealing with object-handles called references which are passed-by-value as well. This terminology and semantics easily confuse many beginners.

It goes like this:

public static void main(String[] args) {
    Dog aDog = new Dog("Max");
    Dog oldDog = aDog;

    // we pass the object to foo
    foo(aDog);
    // aDog variable is still pointing to the "Max" dog when foo(...) returns
    aDog.getName().equals("Max"); // true
    aDog.getName().equals("Fifi"); // false
    aDog == oldDog; // true
}

public static void foo(Dog d) {
    d.getName().equals("Max"); // true
    // change d inside of foo() to point to a new Dog instance "Fifi"
    d = new Dog("Fifi");
    d.getName().equals("Fifi"); // true
}

In the example above aDog.getName() will still return "Max". The value aDog within main is not changed in the function foo with the Dog "Fifi" as the object reference is passed by value. If it were passed by reference, then the aDog.getName() in main would return "Fifi" after the call to foo.

Likewise:

public static void main(String[] args) {
    Dog aDog = new Dog("Max");
    Dog oldDog = aDog;

    foo(aDog);
    // when foo(...) returns, the name of the dog has been changed to "Fifi"
    aDog.getName().equals("Fifi"); // true
    // but it is still the same dog:
    aDog == oldDog; // true
}

public static void foo(Dog d) {
    d.getName().equals("Max"); // true
    // this changes the name of d to be "Fifi"
    d.setName("Fifi");
}

In the above example, Fifi is the dog's name after call to foo(aDog) because the object's name was set inside of foo(...). Any operations that foo performs on d are such that, for all practical purposes, they are performed on aDog, but it is not possible to change the value of the variable aDog itself.

For more information on pass by reference and pass by value, consult the following SO answer: https://stackoverflow.com/a/430958/6005228. This explains more thoroughly the semantics and history behind the two and also explains why Java and many other modern languages appear to do both in certain cases.

Best Answer

Related Solutions

Java – What are the differences between a HashMap and a Hashtable in Java

Java – Is Java “pass-by-reference” or “pass-by-value”

Related Topic